SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(MP) 336

SHEEL NAGU, ANAND PATHAK
Mahip Kumar Rawat – Appellant
Versus
Ashwini Kumar Rai – Respondent


Advocates:
B.P. Singh for petitioner;
M. P. S. Raghuvanshi for respondent No. 1.

ORDER

Nagu, J. -- 1. The instant contempt petition preferred u/Art. 215 of Constitution of India alleges non-compliance of the final order passed by co-ordinate bench of this Court in W.P.2222.2010 passed on 27.6.2011 (C/1) whereby this Court while allowing the petition of workman and setting aside the Award of the Labour Court directed for reinstatement with 50% back wages relevant paras of which are reproduced below for ready reference and convenience :-

“13. Looking to the aforesaid principle of law laid down by theHon'ble Supreme Court in our opinion, the petitioner is entitled 50% back wages.

14. Consequently, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed with the following directions :--

i) The impugned award, Annexure-P/1 dated 23.9.2009, is hereby quashed.

ii) The reference is answered in favour of the petitioner by holding that the termination of services of the petitioner w.e.f. 1.3.99 is illegal and void ab initio.

iii) The petitioner is entitled for reinstatement and other service benefits.

iv) It is further held that the petitioner shall be entitled the salary as the salary he was getting before his termination of service including D.A.

v) It is further

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top